AN ACR MAY HAVE CIRCLED ON THE WRONG SIDE OF THE RWY.

Date: 1994-06 · Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing

Anomalies: deviation-track-heading-all-types|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-other-unknown|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-published-material-policy|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-far

Synopsis

AN ACR MAY HAVE CIRCLED ON THE WRONG SIDE OF THE RWY.

Narrative

AFTER COMPLETING APCH TO RWY 5 AT OAJ; APPROX 5 MI FROM RWY END; WE ENTERED VFR CONDITIONS; BROKE OFF APCH AND ENTERED A L HAND PATTERN TO RWY 23. ACR 10-T INFO PAGE STATES TO USE L HAND PATTERN IN VISUAL CONDITIONS. SINCE WE WERE NEVER CLRED FOR THE 'VISUAL APCH;' OUR CIRCLE-TO- LAND SE OF RWY 5/23 WAS NOT AUTH AS STATED ON THE COMMERCIAL APCH PLATE. IN THE FUTURE; I WILL BE SURE TO REQUEST A VISUAL APCH IN ORDER TO USE A L HAND PATTERN AT OAJ. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 273962: AWOS RPTED WX AT OAJ WAS 17 BROKEN; 24 BROKEN; 10 MI. UNICOM GAVE US AN ARPT ADVISORY. THE ADVISORY INDICATED RWY 23 WAS FAVORED AND THAT THERE WAS NO RPTED TFC. THIS ARPT HAS SEEN CONTROVERSY IN THE PAST FOR PLTS MAKING NONSTANDARD PATTERNS. L TFC IS STANDARD AT OAJ. SINCE MY COMPANY IS NOT AUTH CIRCLING APCHS BELOW 1000 FT AND 3 MI; THE QUESTION THEN IS 'WHAT EXACTLY DID WE JUST DO?' DID WE CONDUCT A CIRCLING APCH AT BETTER THAN VFR CONDITIONS; OR DID WE REACH VFR CONDITIONS AND FLY THE STANDARD PATTERN FOR THAT ARPT?

Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.